On Studybay you can order your academic assignment from one of our 45000 professional writers. Hire your writer directly, without overpaying for agencies and affiliates!
Check price for your assignment

15 bids submitted. Essay Example.

The Miranda vs. Arizona Case

The man called Ernesto Miranda was arrested for raping and kidnapping because his victim identified him in police lineups. After spending a few hours in the interrogation room, police officers received a singed confession from him. As a result, Miranda was found guilty and sentenced to spending 20-30 years in jail. However, the police forgot to inform this criminal of certain Amendment rights, including his right for an attorney and right against self-incrimination when he confessed in writing to his crimes.

At the trial, police officers admitted that Ernesto wasn’t advised to have an attorney, and his written confession was admitted into the case evidence over the objections of defense counsels. Besides, they also testified the earlier verbal confession of Miranda made during his interrogations. This man was found guilty for raping and kidnapping, but he decided to appeal his case to the Supreme Court of Arizona and argued that his confession had to be excluded as he wasn’t fully informed of his legal rights. The good news is that the court denied his appeal, so his conviction is upheld.

When it comes to the 5th amendment, it requires all police officers to warn suspects of specific rights befo9re starting any custodial interrogations, and it also protects criminals against self-incrimination. For example, if all the necessary legal procedures aren’t followed correctly, their prosecution at trials can’t use any damaging admissions. The prosecution is also not allowed to use their statements in this case.

This case was started in 1963 when Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Arizona as the main suspect in such horrible crimes as kidnapping, armed robbery, and raping an 18-year woman. Whole being in the police custody, he agreed to sign his written confession, but after his conviction, lawyers appealed on the legal grounds that their client didn’t know that he was protected from his self-incrimination.

In summary, The Miranda vs. Arizona case answers the important question of whether the police practice of interrogating suspects is allowed to take place without notifying them of their important rights for legal counseling and other protections provided by laws. Every case must be reviewed by courts separately, but it’s wrong to set criminals free only because of some legal procedures, especially when they commit such crimes as the wrong deeds of Ernesto Miranda.

The man called Ernesto Miranda was arrested for raping and kidnapping because his victim identified him in police lineups. After spending a few hours in the interrogation room, police officers received a singed confession from him. As a result, Miranda was found guilty and sentenced to spending 20-30 years in jail.